[Sorcerer] Day of Dupes 2

[Peter Nordstrand]

We are playing the Day of Dupes scenario from Sorcerer's Soul. Previous threads: Character Generation, Session 1. Go to our wiki, for complete player character and demon writeups, as well as an R-map.

Players: Johan, Jonas, Kristoffer. And me.

Pre-Play Prep

The first session had been unsatisfying for Jonas. A lot of prep time went into coming up with a Bangs for him. I ended up with more than a dozen. I also revised and clarified the backstory. My goals were to let Jonas know, through play, most of what is going on, and to push another Bang down his throat every time he opened his mouth. Actually, the goals are linked. I wanted to feed him information and get him involved in conflicts.

I want the players to set their own agenda, and this is best done by poking them with a red hot conflicts and pouring buckets of ice cold information on them.

The prep for the other two players were pretty much the same, but with less worry. One thing I did was to make up a number of Bangs to bring the the different character a bit closer together. For example, an NPC originally involved with one player character could ask another player character to help him out. That sort of thing. The intent was to promote interest in each others characters, and to create a sense of communality and shared storytelling. It is also escalating the conflict, making it bigger than a single character.


Actual Play

Two hours before we were supposed to meet, Kristoffer calls and says he cannot make it. With this short notice, any excuse not involving an emergency room or a morgue is an insult. This is not Kristoffer's first fuck-up. He is not welcome back. Makes me sad, for I do enjoy gaming with him.

• Several Humanity checks were made, which is a fairly good sign. Alexandre (played by Jonas) went from Humanity 4 down to 1 and back up to 3.


• A new demon was summoned and bound.


• Many beans were spilled, and I think it is now easier for both players to get involved and push their own agenda.


• I think I managed to convince the players that I really don't have a pre-planned plot for them to follow. While the NPCs may try to manipulate them into doing certain things, I am most definitely not. Do not try to follow my story line, I don't have one. Question for Jonas and Johan: Do you believe me? Please motivate.

Next post: Details.

[Jonas Ferry]

I believe now that you don't have a planned storyline, but I wasn't so sure at one point during the session.

In the previous thread we talked about the lack of information my character and me had, and that it should change. This session started with Alexendre trying to finish his sister's portrait to show to their father to convince him of his responsibility. Meanwhile the little imp Imp, charming name, talked about what he knew. He wanted Alexendre to promise to help his sister Fanche out of the gutters and to tell his mother the whole story. This was the moment where I didn't know what you had planned.

I'm not that interested in the mother's story, and have made my best to not include her in any way. I've talked about how she hasn't influenced Alexendre much, and how all his contact has been with his father. She's not even living in Paris, but in a countryside manor somewhere, so she's out of the way. What I thought when you had the demon insist on bringing her in was that you had a whole bunch of neat bangs that depended on me going there. I knew that I had a choice, but I felt that if I chose to stay away I better have something more interesting to do myself.

That's when you gave me one of the most well-timed GM comments I've ever heard, when you said that it didn't matter at all what I chose, and that we would have our great story either way. Yes! If you had hinted that you had something great in mind with the mother I would probably have had Alexendre go there, but you would have had a tough time getting me interested in her. That would've been an uphill struggle for you, so it was great to get to know that the choice was up to me. Incidentally, we rolled to see the outcome of the discussion, and Alexendre lost against the Imp. He now knows he should talk to his mother, but he wont, which gives him a -1 die on... ehh... everything else. We'll see if that die will come in use, I think it would be fun if it did. We just need a conflict where talking to mother is involved at least in some remote way.

We were much better at expressing stakes and possible outcomes. I hope I'm not too formal when it comes to stake setting, it's just that I've learned the value of clear stakes from GMing DitV and similar games. Johan also said something good on the tram home: if you don't decide the possible outcomes before the roll, you might as well roll the dice hidden. If the GM can make up what happens after the roll, without committing to anything before, he can fiat just as easily as if the dice were behind a screen. So I think it's good to state upfront what the roll's about and then see what happens.

I want to ask you something back, Peter. Do you think we as players are "doing our job"? The responsibility to make this game good shouldn't rest on your shoulders alone, so if there's anything you want us to do differently, please tell us.

Also, I'm very interested in you detailed writeup. Especially in my character's rituals (what worked, what didn't, did you like it as much as I did?) and his course of actions. Am I being too reserved, or are the situations I get him into interesting enough for you?

[Peter Nordstrand]

Thank you for a fantastic post, Jonas!

It was very early in the session.  I suddenly realized that you probably perceived the situation differently than I did. You thought I was railroading, and that refusing Imp's request would lead to a dead end. And I do see why you would think so: It is a classic sneaky GM trick to manipulate the players. Naturally, I don't do that. I feel strongly about this. And here is the reason why; friends do not manipulate each other like that. This is important. A GM coercing a player should be identified for what he is: A real non-fictional person intimidating, coercing, bullying or otherwise manipulating another non-fictional person. It is a morbid practice. It is anti-social and outright unhealthy. It blurs the line between fictional events and the interaction between real people. It leads to a pathological condition that damages our ability to interact with other people in a normal, healthy way.

If I ever want you to do something specific in a game, I will tell you so straight out. Like this, for example: "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if your character decides to talk to his mother about this?" Or like this: "I wasn't prepared for this turn of events. I cannot figure out what to do now. Lets talk about it and figure out together where we want to take this story next." It is the only way you can be sure that whenever an NPC behaves like a total ass, it is just me trying to make our mutual narrative more interesting, and not me playing mind games with you.

Fuck mind games!

Story Now goddamn it!



All the best,

/Peter

[Ron Edwards]

I've had this same conversation with many people. In my experience, it tends to become a "conversation of action" over several sessions of play (and sometimes across several different games) rather than verbal agreements in a short span of time. At the moment, I suggest that you are all building trust among one another, of a new kind, and that it might be a good idea to let it grow through play, where it can really be demonstrated.

It sounds as if the second session went very well. I'd like to learn more about the fictional events - I don't think I've ever seen a character drop two points of Humanity and gain three in the same session, and it makes me jealous. That sounds like an amazing experience in play! What kind of demon was summoned, and why?

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Oh ... hi,

My post above wasn't about trying to convince Jonas of anything. It was me expressing a sudden insight. It was me saying: "Great post, Jonas. It helped me a lot, enabling me to put words on what I feel about GM manipulation. Thank you."

More later,

/Peter

[Peter Nordstrand]

Alexandre

Player: Jonas

Alexandre is told most of the backstory by Imp: Fanche is the result of an affair between his father and one of the queen's chambermaids. Fanche was born in secrecy and was handed away, so that her mother would be able to marry the Marquis de la Martinière. Scandal avoided.

Moreau shows up. He is a man who claims to work for Alexandre's father as well as for the Marquise de la Martinière (Fanche's mother). Note the difference between a marquis (male) and a marquise (the wife of a marquis). He offers Alexandre a job as an artist at Chateau de la Martinière, if only Alexandre promises not to tell anybody about Fanche's true heritage. No clear decision is made at this point. However, Alexandre makes a point of demanding that Fanche be regarded as a woman of gentle rank, not as a simple whore. This earned him a Humanity gain roll, which he failed.

By defining Fanche as a gentlewoman Jonas is reinforcing the thematic importance of his kicker. Fantastic! Fanche's destiny is now a matter of honor (i.e. Humanity). It helps us define and focus our story. Do I need to develop this? Or is it obvious to everyone why I think of this as a landmark decision? Let me know.

Realizing that his sister may be in danger, Alexandre summons a demon to protect her. O, the arrogance! This takes up most of the remaining session. Alexandre's sorcery is conducted through art, and is defined much as being in the madness corner of the "appalling diagram" in Sex and Sorcery. The rituals involves a kidnapped nobleman's daughter, whom Alexandre mistreats and forces to embroider a dirty old scarf with gold thread while three musicians play increasingly ferocious tunes. Alexandre drinks copious amounts of wine, and leaps around his atelier in a caricature of courtly dance. The binding includes the ritual purification of the now bright white demonic scarf.

When the rituals are over, Alexandre just walks out with the demon, leaving the musicians and the wronged noblewoman in his apartment. I wonder what effect, if any, this will have on future events.

Shawl

Object demon. Telltale—Never stains. Needs to be cleaned.
Stamina 5, Will 6, Lore 5, Power 6

Abilities: Link and Psychic Force used by the demon, Vitality and Fast used by Fanche, Perception (Sense when Fanche is in danger) used by Alexandre.[/list]

Finally a Contain: Shawl must always stay within reach of Fanche.

The session ends with Alexandre showing up at Fanche's door, drunk and unruly. He hands her the demon scarf and tells her everything he knows about her parents and what happened. Despite his state, he treats her courteously like a gentlewoman. We leave them sitting in her ramshackle residence; him plastered and her crying silently.

I don't think I've ever seen a character drop two points of Humanity and gain three in the same session, and it makes me jealous.

Oh. He dropped three points and gained two. The three humanity losses were a consequence of the rituals, and of abducting the poor noblewoman. The gains were the result of respecting his sisters proper place* in the social order, treating her courteously, and protecting her from Moreau's defamation. In retrospect, one or two humanity gain checks were probably a bit dubious. In the future I will demand action, not just words to get the roll. I'm talking about the difference between "hey there, my sister is a gentlewoman!" and "Take that back, or else..." and then being prepared to enforce the "or else".


*) Proper as defined by Jonas, not by me. If he had decided she was just another low-life then that's how I would've considered her from a humanity point of view. Does that make sense?

[Peter Nordstrand]

I'm back.

Théobald

Player: Johan.

Valvert, a competitor, tries to convince Théobald to let him act as a middle man rather than importing tobacco directly himself. In return, Valvert promises to have his father (a magistrate and customs official who was responsible for putting Théobalds latest shipment in quarantine) drop all charges. Charges? Well, in the previous session Théobald had been imprisoned by Valvert's father and escaped, only to illegally remove his cargo from the quarantined ship. Anyway, Théobald declines the "offer." This is all directly related to Théobalds kicker, but we spent the rest of the evening following up on other events from the previous session. That is okay. We are still dealing with problems and situations that arise from the kicker and from characters mentioned (by Johan) on the back of the character sheet.

Antoine de Racieux, a banker who Théobald owes a substantial amount of money, asks for help to flee the country. He needs a place to stay over night, and he needs someone to secretly liquidate his assets. De Raciuex doesn't tell what he is suddenly afraid of, but Théobald promises to help him out, earning a Humanity gain roll in the process. "Pay debts when you can; until you do so, give favors freely to the person owed."

While de Racieux makes himself at home at Théobald's residence, Théobald himself has a secret meeting with Mme. de Racieux, his paramour. She asks Théobald to kill her husband, claiming that he beats her. She also reveals that de Racieux is part of a conspiracy against Cardinal Richelieu, and that he is very upset for having lost a document containing the names of his co-conspirators. This explains why the good banker is suddenly so keen on getting out of the country.

Note: When coming up with the two de Racieux-related Bangs above, I originally had Kristoffer in mind. His character had been involved with de Racieux in the first session, so this was one of those things that were supposed to tie the plot closer together. Oh well. They are still good Bangs.

Théobald isn't very keen on becoming a murderer, so he only promises to do his best to solve the situation. Mme. de Racieux declares that she will stay at a friends house in the meantime.

Time for the next surprise, which I came up with at the spur of the moment. When Théobald comes home, he finds de Racieux murdered! Hugo (his demon) witnessed the slaying but didn't intervene. He describes the killer, and reveals that it was another demon. The demon had impaled de Racieux with a sword marked as belonging to Comte de Veillot. The sword was still stuck in the body. It had also left a ring at the scene of the crime.Those familiar with Sorcerer's Soul will know the demon as Lukos, although my players have yet to hear that name.

Note: I'm not sure it was a good idea to reveal Lukos' demonic nature already. Perhaps that should have been left for the players to discover for themselves. No big deal, anyhow. I'd rather give away too much information (is that even possible?) than too little.

Théobald quickly loots the dead body for cash before he and Hugo moves it to its own house. De Racieux's body is placed exactly the way it was found, including the sword and the ring. As a result of a die-roll, Théobald is halted by the Cardinal's Guards, on his way to the de Racieux residence, but manages to talk his way out of trouble.

Note: Johan decided to have his character move de Racieux's dead body because it was potentially funnier and more interesting than any of the more rational options. I think that's great! He is stirring the pot, and messing things up and I love it. Only good can come of this kind of play.

Finally, I think it is worth noting that Théobalds storyline is clearly in the second session, while poor Alexandre (Jonas' character) is finally where he should have been after the first session. My prediction for our next sitting is that Alexandre's story will begin to gain momentum, while Théobald's will ... eh ... speed along. Actually, for Théobald, I think things are about to explode. One or two additional pieces of information, and perhaps an unexpected twist, and the remaining sessions will be all about me responding to his choice of actions and not the other way around. At least that's what I hope.




Cheers,


/Peter

[Jonas Ferry]

Hello Peter,

When you say that you will demand action, not just words, have you considered speech acts? I'm only half-joking – I think there're many situations it could be interesting to roll for humanity where you've only talked. Think about "keep secrets (really)" for example, wouldn't situations where you *not* say something, an action in itself according to me, warrant a humanity roll?

I'm mainly curious what in our game has made you feel the need to draw a distinction between words and deeds, and not really in discussing hypothetical future situations where we might or might not roll dice. We'll consider them as they come, right? In your example you mention Alexendre defending his sister's honor. If you're referring to the Moraeu scene, Alexendre did throw him out of his house because of the insult and didn't answer him regarding the job either. Had he continued to mock her violent action certainly would have ensued (Alex even made sure where his sword was to be prepared for a possible fight).

I had a lot of fun during the ritual, and I think I got to know Alexendre a little better. I considered him a bit harmless before, but now I know he'll be prepared to kidnap and degrade innocents to protect his sister. We also know that his sorcery depends on intoxication, artistry and debauchery, which is good and suitable. It was a bit strange that a single procedure of getting a new demon would require so many potential humanity losses (three, or was it more than that?), as each demon introduced would risk losing the character. That's not good if it's supposed to be encouraged. But I was prepared to lose my character if that's what would've happened, it would've been an appropriate thing considering the hubris displayed by Alexendre.

On Théobald's story, I agree that I very much like that Johan do stuff that's fun and interesting rather than optimally clever. One of the most boring aspects of roleplaying in my view is endless discussions, in- or out-of-character, of what might happen if we do this or that, and what could happen if... and so on. It's much better to do the thing that seems to lead to the most fun and then trust the GM not to pull stuff like "oh, but you didn't prepare for going into a catacomb so you have no torches" or something like that. It's so easy to make any plan *look* clever, if the GM is willing to do so, and I'm sure me and Johan will signal if that's what we want. I mean, it sucks if the *character* looks incompetent or stupid just because the player didn't spend a lot of time thinking things through. Especially in a musketeer game, impulsive actions should rewarded, right?

Revealing that the attacker was a demon was a very good thing if you ask me. I suppose you have noticed that I've had Alexendre roll Lore once or twice to figure out whether anything demonic has been involved. He checked Moreau in the first session, for example. That's because I as a player would *like* something to be demonic, something else than our characters. So I think it's fine that Théobald is involved with an antagonistic demon, especially since we don't know who is controlling it. I'm curious at least. That was part of the reason for summoning a new demon as well, more demons mean more otherworldly problems to deal with. I also think it was good that you didn't keep the result of who's in control hidden. I don't see how keeping it hidden would improve play, since most everything else is shared by all participants.

Do you know that I have no idea what to do with Alexendre in the next session? His goal is to make his sister honorable in the eyes of others, but I don't know how. I want the father's help, so that's something I want to do. Alexendre will bring his sister to see their father, and to get him to help out. Working with Moreau or for Martinière is out of the question right now, Alexendre want that child murderer out of the way. Not dead, perhaps, but he shouldn't be working for Alex's father.

All in all, I had fun and look forward to the next session on Tuesday.

[Peter Nordstrand]

Hi again,

I'm not going to be able to address all the things you have brought up in this thread, Jonas. Or rather, I'll leave several of your points to face to face discussions. If you would like other people's input on the rules or whatever (such as "three humanity rolls to summon one demon, why?") feel free to ask questions in the Adept Press forum. I will not take that as a sign of mistrust. Anyway, you will have my answers tomorrow.

I want to ask you something back, Peter. Do you think we as players are "doing our job"? The responsibility to make this game good shouldn't rest on your shoulders alone, so if there's anything you want us to do differently, please tell us.

You are both doing fine. Thank you for asking. Keep doing what you did last time. Do not worry about my plans for the campaign, just play your character anyway you like. Keep embracing opportunities to gain or loose humanity. I feel blessed to be gaming with you both.

When you say that you will demand action, not just words, have you considered speech acts? I'm only half-joking – I think there're many situations it could be interesting to roll for humanity where you've only talked. Think about "keep secrets (really)" for example, wouldn't situations where you *not* say something, an action in itself according to me, warrant a humanity roll?

I'm mainly curious what in our game has made you feel the need to draw a distinction between words and deeds, and not really in discussing hypothetical future situations where we might or might not roll dice. We'll consider them as they come, right? In your example you mention Alexandre defending his sister's honor. If you're referring to the Moraeu scene, Alexendre did throw him out of his house because of the insult and didn't answer him regarding the job either. Had he continued to mock her violent action certainly would have ensued (Alex even made sure where his sword was to be prepared for a possible fight).

I have considered speech acts, as a matter of fact. Keeping a secret (or not) is a good example, and we agree about its implications. However, this does not mean that you are automatically acting honorably by just saying so. People often say one thing and do something else. If you want to defend your honor, it is not enough to just say "hey, you insulted me, that is not acceptable". You need a bloody apology, that's what you need. And if you do not get your apology, you must fight for your conviction. If everything else fails, you must be prepared to defend your honor with your sword; if not, then you aren't acting honorably at all.

That's what I mean when I talk about demanding action, not just words.

A Very Important Caveat
The above is true only if you want to defend your honor. In Sorcerer, as you know, you are not required to act honorably. Refusing to defend your honor is always a valid and viable option. The decision is yours and yours alone; not mine, or Ron's, or anybody else's. Ultimately, making these decisionsis what Sorcerer is all about.[/list]

If you are interested, download The Three Musketeers from www.gutenberg.org and read the first chapter. Young d'Artagnan is an overzealous hot-head and even outright stupid, if you ask me. But goddamit, he is honorable!

Question for Ron: What do you think of the above? Do you agree?

Do you know that I have no idea what to do with Alexendre in the next session? His goal is to make his sister honorable in the eyes of others, but I don't know how. I want the father's help, so that's something I want to do. Alexendre will bring his sister to see their father, and to get him to help out. Working with Moreau or for Martinière is out of the question right now, Alexendre want that child murderer out of the way. Not dead, perhaps, but he shouldn't be working for Alex's father.

Actually, not worrying in advance about what to do next session is only good, if you ask me. If you have something specific in mind, such as Alexandre meeting his father, it is cool to let me know. Perhaps our first scene will be such a meeting. We'll see. But never ever worry about not planning enough. Overplanning can be a serious problem, but having no plans at all is always fine. (You need goals, naturally, for your character, but that is something else.)




Enough talking. I need to prepare for actual play. See you on Tuesday.


All the best,

/Peter Nordstrand

[Peter Nordstrand]

Dear reader,

Question: Is this thread useful and/or interesting to you? PM me and let me know. A one sentence answer is fine, but if you want to elaborate, that is fine too. Thank you in advance.

/Peter

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I agree with both of you.

Best,
Ron